Edison Fixture Co. v. Goldblatt

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Edison Fixture Co. v. Goldblatt

129 A. 924, 3 N.J. Misc. 553, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 176

DecidedMay 19, 1925

StatusPublished

This text of 129 A. 924 (Edison Fixture Co. v. Goldblatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Edison Fixture Co. v. Goldblatt, 129 A. 924, 3 N.J. Misc. 553, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 176 (N.J. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Ourlui.

This suit was brought in the Passaic District Court to recover the balance dne of $24 on a written contract. The ease was tried by the judge without a jury, resulting in a judgment for the defendant. The testimony shows that the defendant cannot read. He testified that he signed the paper on which the suit is based, because he was told that it was not an agreement, but only a receipt for the money that he had paid.

The case is controlled by onr decision in the case of Edison Fixture Co., Inc., v. Gleason, 3 N. J. Adv. R. 194; 127 Atl. Rep. 555. That ease holds the evidence permitted of the inference by the trial judge, sitting without a jury, that the plaintiff deceived the defendant as to the fact that the defendant was signing a contract by the false representation that he was signing, as a matter of form, a paper having no obligating force. So, in the present case.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pee Ourlui.

This suit was brought in the Passaic District Court to recover the balance dne of $24 on a written contract. The ease was tried by the judge without a jury, resulting in a judgment for the defendant. The testimony shows that the defendant cannot read. He testified that he signed the paper on which the suit is based, because he was told that it was not an agreement, but only a receipt for the money that he had paid.

The case is controlled by onr decision in the case of Edison Fixture Co., Inc., v. Gleason, 3 N. J. Adv. R. 194; 127 Atl. Rep. 555. That ease holds the evidence permitted of the inference by the trial judge, sitting without a jury, that the plaintiff deceived the defendant as to the fact that the defendant was signing a contract by the false representation that he was signing, as a matter of form, a paper having no obligating force. So, in the present case.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

129 A. 924, 3 N.J. Misc. 553, 1925 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edison-fixture-co-v-goldblatt-nj-1925.